2/28/2008
Kagen would be targeted by new ethics panel
The Congress Daily reported Wednesday that following the passage of promised ethics reform legislation in the Democrat-controlled House, the GOP will request that allegations of ethical violations against Representative Steve Kagen be investigated by the new committee.
In late 2007, the House Ethics Task Force recommended the creation of the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) – a six-member panel that would have the power to initiate complaints against elected officials and their staff members.
For all of us amateur pols out here, Susan Crabtree at The Hill wrote an intriguing summary of the parliamentary maneuvering surrounding the OCE legislation. When the Crabtree article was posted late Tuesday evening, OCE legislation was expected to come to the floor Thursday – and though much maneuvering was anticipated, the bill was expected to pass with bipartisan support.
Fast forward to yesterday, when a GOP-created list of targeted Democratic lawmakers made the rounds in the capitol. Lawmakers on the list would be targeted when the House ultimately votes to create an independent Office of Congressional Ethics – although the Congress Daily article said “the leak of the GOP’s plans could impact the vote [to establish an OCE].”
Ok, this list. It’s a list of 10 Democrats, including our own Representative Kagen, in the company of the likes of Rep. Millions-in-the-Freezer Jefferson, as well as Rep. John Murtha and Rep. Maxine Waters. Kagen is included in this elite crew as a result of allegations the Kagen campaign received $18,400 in campaign contributions made by his children in September, 2006.
Dan Bice did the snooping around last October.
Kagen's four children recently gave the maximum donation of $4,600 to Dad's campaign fund for a total of $18,400, records show.
The kids - who range in age from 18 to 26 and are listed as students - all turned over their donations on Sept. 30, the last date of the reporting period. Three of the siblings maxed out on the same day in 2005, giving a total of $12,600 back then.
That brings the total take by the congressman from his kids to $31,000. Clearly, college work-study isn't what it used to be.
"The entire Kagen family supports Congressman Kagen's efforts to lead our nation in a positive and new direction," said a Friday statement from David Williams, Kagen's chief of staff.
… Initially, Gayle Kagen referred questions to her husband's staff. But she bristled when told the issue had to do with the campaign contributions from her children. "There's nothing illegal going on here," she said.
"I don't know about you, but when I was a student, I didn't have $4,600 lying around to donate to a campaign," said one GOP operative.
Not that there's anything inherently illegal about children of any age donating to their parents, according to a spokesman for the Federal Election Commission. The feds are interested only in knowing that the money is controlled by the kids and that the donations are voluntarily.
Lo and behold, today’s expected vote in the House on an Office of Congressional Ethics has been cancelled due to dissension in Democratic Party ranks. Details are in new Crabtree article. So…. stay tuned. How will Rep. Kagen vote? When will an investigation proceed?
NY Times calls for a vote - sooner rather than later.
COMMENTS
There's no doubt that something illegal might have taken place, but it was my understanding that conservatives aren't supposed to care about where your money comes from. Conservatives are supposed to be against campaign finance reform because it limits our ability to give however much we want to whoever we want.
But I agree, college kids donating $4600 to a campaign is fishy.
Stephen Flynn (Thu Feb 28 00:11:49 2008)
Yes, Stephen, the shoe is on the other foot now. And it does indeed look bad, though Kagen should be held to current regulations.
But current campaign funding laws demand even worse violations of public trust. We want lawmakers to represent the public and make good decisions for the country, but our privatized electoral system virtually demands that lawmakers take money from special interests that want exactly the opposite. Then we expect them to vote against those interests and for the public good. Who do you think is going to win?
We are not very smart.
Jack Lohman (Thu Feb 28 07:23:48 2008)
Well, maybe every congresspersons kids should be investigated as to the source of their money and that they donated to their parents' election on their own free will. What a waste of time. Kagen can gift a lot more that that to his kids and I'm sure that if the kids used it on campaign contributions there isn't a power in the world that can say they were "coerced". Besides, Kagen did a lot of self funding of his campaign, which has no limits. So, he could have self funded that amount also. There isn't an ethics smoking gun here. Lets' strengthen the ethics rules (something that wasn't even discussed under a Republican Congress by the way)and go after the Jeffersons and the others who are clearly doing fishy things.
Well Dave, look at the fact that the children's contributions came on the last day of the reporting period in both years (2005, 2006). Ok, Dr. Kagen could have contributed the dollars to his own campaign, but he wanted his fundraising numbers to look good. Therein was the genesis of an ethics smoking gun. JE
dave allen (Thu Feb 28 07:28:33 2008)
Why would anyone find it unusual that the adult children of a wealthy and successful physician, whose father is also a wealthy and successful physician, would have money of their own to spend or contribute as they please? Why is work-study even mentioned? Has anyone bothered to check if the Kagan kids are recipients of work-study aid? Please stick to the facts.
Republicans have a hit list. Kagan is on it. Not surprising. But if this is the best the party can do to cast a pall on the doctor's ethics, they had best find another strategy.
It's hard to read this type of fluff about Steve Kagan in light of the Renzi indictment for corruption and the resignation less than six months ago of the Brown County Republican Party chairman, Don Fleischman. He has been charged with grotesque misconduct with minor boys in Green Bay. He's out on bail and was compelled to move out of his home across the street from a group home for troubled youth - which is where the boys came from. According to the complaint, he was smoking pot and drinking beer with them, and then engaging in sexual activities with the boys. He also offered to do their laundry. Eeeeeeuw. Here are the gruesome details.
But Steve Kagan is a terrible, terrible man for working hard, making money, and providing generously for his children, who contributed the LEGAL limit to his campaign.
The FEC will ask if the money was controlled by the adults who donated it. Undoubtedly the answer will be, yes, they controlled the money and freely chose to donate it to Dad's campaign. End of discussion? Let's hope so.
Republicans used to praise those who worked hard, succeeded financially, provided well for their families, educated their children - in short, all the things the Kagens have done. But apparently the fact that the Kagens are Democrats trumps all they have achieved over the years.
Please go and read up on the maneuvering in the Congress over the ethics legislation at issue. The Republicans are fighting hard to prevent passage of this legislation, using complex procedural moves to thwart it. Some of these Republican strategies will compel Democrats to vote against the legislation. It's not a simple up or down vote for a conscientious member of the House - don't be deceived by simplistic explanations of the process. Republicans are anxious to set up Democrats to vote no so they can use this against them in the coming elections. Your only defense as a citizen is to educate yourself, share what you've learned with others, and make sure you understand the issues before making a judgment.
Just to keep the record straight, Republicans and Democrats are using a variety of parliamentary and procedural maneuvers to revise, toughen and/or defeat the measure. This is bipartisan ethics escape. JE
Joanne Roush (Thu Feb 28 10:06:21 2008)
But yes, we conservatives do care where the money comes from. We just hate seeing it channeled through a 527 (Moveon.org) where, because there is no individual donor listed, they can advertise any way they please and as close to the election as they please.
There is definitely a problem with the First Amendment being badly bruised when individual citizens, no matter who they are, are unable to publicly talk about political candidates.
C.R. Stevenson (Thu Feb 28 10:37:33 2008)
This is certainly a hit list and appears to be targeted at the high profile anti war members of Congress. A full list would be appreciated.
I agree with Flynn above, these sorts of charges are totally disingenuous with regard to the usual torturing of the rules performed by Republicans at all levels of government.
Lon Ponschock (Thu Feb 28 11:20:19 2008)
It’s hard to accept Republican’s criticism about ethics when they blocked an assembly vote to move the Impartial Justice bill from committee to the floor for a vote. Are ethics only a Dem issue?
See how your Rep voted HERE.
Ok Jack, interesting way to make your point, but you're using a pretty broad brush. It's our federal legislators (Dems and GOPers) maneuvering over ethics reform. Of course, it's our state officials dealing now with Impartial Justice. JE
Jack Lohman (Thu Feb 28 12:26:52 2008)
At least some of those on the Left also don’t want to see MoveOn.org funnel their money through 527s. Or WMC, WRTL, Club for Growth or any of the other right-wing interests.
But that’s the way the system is, and the R’s are not lifting a finger to fix it (and as my previous post noted, they’re doing everything they can to block reform).
Jack Lohman (Thu Feb 28 12:45:44 2008)
Jo, no smoke no fire here with Kagen. Regardless of the timing I think a parent has the right to have his kids support his campaign. Since a parent has a right to give his kids tax free money up to $12000 per annum the kids can use that money for what they want. Is this kind of scrutiny into the family life what we really want the Government or Ethics panels to do? Lets move on to real issues of reform.
I understand the tax code Dave. It's legal for all of Dennis Troha's buddies to have given him money too - but NOT for the express purpose of turning it into campaign contributions. Nope, I don't think your argument flies when it comes to federal election laws. JE
dave allen (Thu Feb 28 13:38:04 2008)
Jo, We're talking about the children of the candidate here. What do you want to do put the kids on the stand like they do in China and North Korea? This is a non-issue as far as ethics go. Go after someone who is doing some real nasty stuff. There is plenty of that going on.
dave allen (Thu Feb 28 17:06:20 2008)
You Dave, have the last word. (North Korea???)
Jo E. (Thu Feb 28 17:13:15)
Jo,
Thanks for letting me have the last word. That feels good!. But anyway , my North Korea and China reference has to do with the ways those countries enforced some of their laws. Mothers spying on sons, fathers on daughters , husbands against wives. I don't think we want the government to be prying into family life that way when we are talking about in this thread. "When your father gave you the $12000 did he tell you it was because he needed campaign money? And by the way it's either perjury for you or jail for your father" No, we don't need to split hairs that closely for what rules your referring to here. No need to post this if you don't want I just wanted you to know how strongly I feel about witch hunts (against either party).
dave allen (Thu Feb 28 17:58:51 2008)
|
